Editorials from around Pennsylvania

Editorials from around Pennsylvania:

___

NEWLY PUBLISHED MEDICAL MARIJUANA RULES KEEP PUBLIC NEEDLESSLY IN THE DARK

May 21

In yet another reminder that it helps to read the fine print, new temporary medical marijuana regulations made public last week underline the Pennsylvania Department of Health’s stubborn insistence on restricting public access to information about the identities of those who scored permit applications for the multibillion-dollar new industry.

Worse, there’s every indication that the department was trying to pull as fast one on the taxpayers.

As PennLive’s Wallace McKelvey reports, the agency, as is its custom, issued a press release about the new regulations. But it conveniently left out the part about the access rules.

The records proposal did appear in the Pennsylvania Bulletin in May 12. But unless they knew what they were looking for in the thicket of legalese, interested parties would have missed it entirely. Members of the public, meanwhile, had a scant five days to submit comments on the temporary rules before they were enacted.

It’s another sign of the Wolf administration’s disturbing penchant for secrecy, despite its public pose of defending and championing government transparency and accountability.

To review:

Unlike other states, Pennsylvania has refused to open the books and reveal its $1 billion pitch to lure Amazon and its HQ2 to the Keystone State. Both Philadelphia and Pittsburgh have made the online retailer’s list of finalists for its new headquarters.

The Pennsylvania Office of Open Records repeatedly sided with those seeking access to those records, including news organizations and others. Yet, mind-bogglingly, the state has filed suit to keep that information a secret.

Then there’s Gov. Tom Wolf’s steadfast refusal to release the findings of an Office of Inspector General’s report on the 2017 controversy surrounding his second-in-command, Lt. Gov. Mike Stack.

The new regulations appear to have come in response to PennLive’s ongoing effort in state court to obtain the identities of the panelists who reviewed the applications for 12 grower/processor and 27 dispensary permits.

Last August, the state Office of Open Records ruled that the agency had to disclose that information.

The Department of Health, in turn, appealed the decision to Commonwealth Court, where it is still pending nine months later. PennLive’s initial records request was made in May 2017.

As McKelvey notes, Pennsylvania’s medical marijuana law included language barring applicants from obtaining the names of people reviewing applications. However, it doesn’t prohibit the release of that information to journalists and the general public.

Most other states with marijuana programs have disclosed such information although, in most cases, after the permits were awarded.

As McKelvey further reported, good government advocates have pointed to the possibility of conflicts of interest on a secret panel.

Through a spokeswoman, the Health Department reiterated its position that keeping the panelists’ names secret safeguarded them from outside pressure and threats to public safety.

Wolf’s spokesman, J.J. Abbott, said the Governor’s Office shared the Health Department’s position.

Last week, the Commonwealth Court ordered both PennLive and the Department of Health to file briefs addressing what effect, if any, the new regulations would have on public access to information. It was unclear whether they would impact the current litigation.

But we share the position of Joshua Bonn, the attorney representing PennLive in the case, who logically asserted that the “Department of Health does not have authority to enact regulations that nullify the Right-to-Know Law.” Only the General Assembly has the power to declare what is, and is not, a public record.

Simply put, the regulation would set the dangerous precedent because it “would allow agencies to make any information non-public simply by enacting a regulation,” Bonn said.

Nor does the Department of Health have the right, Melissa Melewsky, the media law counsel for the Pennsylvania NewsMedia Association observed, to changes its public access rules just because they’re the subject of a legal challenge

“An agency can’t change the rules after you file an appeal,” she said. “That would encourage changes to defeat pending litigation on a regular basis.”

In effect, she added, allowing such changes to be retroactive would “change the rules of the game” for anyone seeking public records.

The Health Department should drop the charade, stop the needless and pointless legal gamesmanship, and release the identities of the review panel.

If it’s good enough for other states, it should be good enough for Pennsylvania.

Particularly for an administration that prides itself on its transparency.

__ PennLive.com

Online: https://bit.ly/2x9haVG

___

SPEED ISN’T GOAL

May 21

For some reason - impending midterm elections, perhaps - President Trump and many congressional Republicans think that special counsel Robert Mueller should wrap up his investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.

The occasion for their grousing was the anniversary of Mueller’s appointment as special counsel. “Congratulations, America. We are now into the second year of the greatest Witch Hunt in American History,” Trump tweeted to mark the anniversary.

But Mueller should take his time. Thoroughness, rather than speed, must be the objective of the investigation, regardless of its results.

As noted by data maven Philip Bump of The Washington Post, the average length of investigations by special counsels and special prosecutors is 1,154 days. The Watergate investigation took more than two years. Kenneth Starr’s assorted investigations of President Bill Clinton went on for more than five years.

Republican lawmakers themselves should be appreciative of lengthy investigations. They conducted eight separate investigations over more than three years into the tragic deaths of American personnel at the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, on Sept. 11, 2012.

Nothing in Mueller’s record suggests that he is doing anything other than meticulously investigating a complicated case. Congress should act to ensure that he is allowed to finish the job, however long it might take.

__ The Scranton Times-Tribune

Online: https://bit.ly/2KPaNc7

___

PA.’S GAMBLING BET

May 19

The Pennsylvania Legislature is going to make millions of Pennsylvania sports bettors happy (and likely, thousands of them broke).

State Gaming Control officials and lawmakers are working out the particulars concerning legalized sports betting - including what the state’s cut will be.

Right now, the state is planning to tax sports bets at 36 percent. It’s a rate that some experts say is unrealistic, especially compared to Nevada’s 6.75 percent and New Jersey’s planned 8 percent and West Virginia’s 10 percent. There also have been discussions of charging casinos in the state $10 million for a sports betting license.

The U.S. Supreme Court paved the way for this last Monday by striking down a 1992 law that barred every state but Nevada from offering sports betting.

Like others, Pennsylvania lawmakers and betting outfits have been standing on the sidelines since last year just waiting for the Supreme Court to rule the way it did. The Legislature already approved the concept of sports gambling.

There’s no question that many want to bet on sports legally. The American Gaming Association estimates $154 billion was bet illegally on sports in 2016, and close to $10 billion this year on the NCAA’s basketball tournament alone.

State Rep. George Dunbar, R-Penn Township, Westmoreland County, rightfully notes that the state should require a sports betting entity to have a physical presence in Pennsylvania. That would prevent betting websites from monopolizing the state’s sports betting industry.

So it’s a given that sports bettors will be happy and the state treasury will take new revenue. It might be less than you think, though: Nevada brought in just $17 million on $4.9 billion in bets.

Sports betting is a relatively harmless vice - we expect it to cause far fewer problems than we foresee when (not if) the state approves recreational marijuana use.

But the larger concern we have is with the Legislature. It’s running out of vices to turn into revenue. Pennsylvania increased its tax on cigarettes, tobacco and vaping in recent years; it owns its own liquor stores.

At some point, it has to stop taxing sins and rein in spending. It seems that point has arrived. Just to name one example, we’ve never seen routine state road repairs and maintenance put off for as long it is now.

Gov. Wolf’s proposed $33 billion 2018-19 budget banks on sports betting and borrowing $1.5 billion against a one-time windfall to make ends meet.

And then we’ll all have to ignore the hypocrisy that comes with legalizing another vice just so the state can get its share. With gambling, it started with the Lottery in 1972 and all of its expansions, then escalated over the years, through joining with other states for Powerball and the rise of casinos.

The hypocrisy extends to sports leagues. Remember when the NFL forced the Rooney family to restructure its ownership to prevent some of the Steelers owners from divesting themselves from horse racing and dog racing tracks in New York and Florida, respectively?

It was to maintain the league’s integrity. The NFL is still talking about preserving the integrity of the game.

But the NFL also is talking about getting a fee from point spreads bet on games, partnering with casinos and making it possible for fans attending NFL games to make bets during the game playing out in front of them.

No matter what the details of sports betting in Pennsylvania turn out to be, the state needs to raise revenue through increased prosperity but also through curtailed spending.

But that’s certainly no sure bet.

__ The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review

Online: https://bit.ly/2s2qoOK

___

COP KILLER SHOWS HIS COWARDICE

May 22

Eric Frein exuded cowardice when he used the cover of darkness, trees and vegetation to mask his ambush of two Pennsylvania state troopers in September 2014 in Pike County.

One of the troopers died at the attack scene - outside the Blooming Grove state police barracks - and another was wounded so severely that he has required at least 18 major surgeries since the attack.

Frein subsequently was convicted and currently is on death row, which in Pennsylvania is tantamount to a prison life sentence because of this state’s long-demonstrated anathema toward carrying out executions.

As for a convicted murderer’s available appeals process, it moves more slowly than any snail.

However, that process often revives the cowardice that caused the killer to snuff out the life of another person in the first place.

That’s what Pennsylvania is witnessing now regarding Eric Frein, whose foolhardy thinking was that the attack might spark a revolution.

Frein has decided that, rather than continuing to accept the unpleasant realities of the court sentence meted out to him - a sentence that, so far, hasn’t been nearly as harsh as the sentence that he inflicted on his two victims - he should now be granted a new trial.

Frein’s lawyer argued before the state Supreme Court last week that investigators extracted a confession from Frein after Frein had declined to waive his Miranda right to remain silent.

The lawyer, William Ruzzo, said, “we believe it’s a simple matter, that if Mr. Frein unequivocally asserted his right to silence, then the commonwealth should have scrupulously honored the invocation of that right.”

It’s true that the commonwealth has the responsibility to comply with all rules governing interrogations, but it’s a defendant’s responsibility to continue to remain silent rather than succumb to any further questions that might be asked after having chosen not to waive Miranda.

Frein apparently cracked under those further questions, which, in fact, was his own error or due to his own weakness.

But Frein’s lawyer has raised a reasonable point nonetheless.

In considering Frein’s request, there also are several other points that the high court must consider, including:

- That Frein was not permitted to speak immediately with an attorney that his family had retained on the night he was captured. The lawyer reportedly was kept outside during three hours of questioning.

- That the trial judge allowed too much testimony about the impact of the crime on victims.

- That, despite having been read his Miranda rights, Frein said he wanted to talk about where he had hidden a rifle or rifles in the woods, which Ruzzo said was prompted by Frein’s concern that children might find it or them.

There were indications at the hearing that justices might be considering ruling the interrogation issue as a harmless error when stacked alongside the extensive evidence used to convict Frein.

The task before the justices is important; their decision could end up impacting cases in the future.

But the bottom line is that some killers are cowards when their own lives are at stake or their own circumstances are unpleasant.

Frein is verifying that - loud and clear.

__ The Altoona Mirror

Online: https://bit.ly/2KOlHyM

___

THOSE WHO BUNGLED COACH’S FIRING MUST BE HELD TO ACCOUNT

May 23

The independent investigation of the firing and rehiring of Easton Area High School wrestling coach JaMarr Billman has confirmed what most people already knew: The termination of his coaching contract was a flawed rush to judgment that violated any sense of fairness. And school district policies, too.

Another finding suggests why such a decision could be rammed through - a poisonous atmosphere in which employees are fearful of challenging the higher-ups.

It’s inexplicable why Billman was relieved of his coaching job without the courtesy of a performance review. And without giving adequate notice to the school board.

The investigative report, put together by outside attorneys, places the “non-renewal” of Billman’s contract in the lap of Assistant Superintendent Alyssa Emili - with concurrence from Superintendent John Reinhart, who would reverse the decision two days later.

The incident that precipitated the controversy was an Easton wrestler failing to make weight at the PIAA state tournament. While Billman accepted responsibility, the report says there was a miscommunication between Athletic Director Jim Pokrivsak and Billman about a weight allowance for wrestlers during the tournament. It resulted in a disqualification and a huge disappointment for a young athlete.

Still, the way Billman’s status went from respected coach to “outta here” was nothing short of shameful. Billman also endured a physical and verbal attack from a relative of the wrestler involved. Anyone interested should read the 10-page report.

Emili, investigators concluded, was reacting to people in the community who were “beyond livid” over the PIAA tournament snafu. She set the termination process in motion, setting up a conference call of the executive cabinet (Reinhart, Emili, the chief operating officer and superintendent of district operations), who decided to end Billman’s contract. Emili directed the high school principal and athletic director to inform Billman.

For the most part, the school board was kept out of the loop. Sure, there’s good reason that board members don’t dictate hiring and firings, but oversight is needed to make sure policies are followed. In this case, the district was embroiled in a controversy with racial overtones. Members of the Easton NAACP alleged that Billman, who is black, was subjected to discrimination.

Two days after Billman received his pink slip - and after students mounted protests in his defense at the high school - Reinhart met with Billman and reversed the decision.

While the report found no evidence that administrators acted with racial animus, it noted that Billman hadn’t received a performance evaluation for the season, and hadn’t been able to enact a corrective plan for any criticisms, as a previous coach had. Billman received a good performance review the previous year.

Other findings: The district didn’t follow its chain of command. Some administrators withheld, destroyed or delayed notes and messages sought by the investigators. Some employees said the district fosters a culture in which staff “believe they cannot work professionally, responsibly or freely without fear of reprisal or workplace retaliation.”

Did that culture come into play here? According to the report, Emili ignored concerns raised by the athletic director and high school principal that Billman deserved an evaluation and an opportunity to respond. No one stood up to Emili out of fear, the report suggests.

If some members of Easton’s wrestling community and school officials harbor doubts about Billman’s performance, fine - there is an established way to address this. The short-circuiting of the process isn’t just an embarrassment, it’s a denial of an employee’s expectation of fair, policy-driven treatment. It feeds suspicion of racial prejudice, especially if white coaches coming under fan-driven fire didn’t face the same swift hammer.

Those responsible for this breakdown must be held accountable. The error at the PIAA tournament might have been a final straw for some people; it shouldn’t have triggered this kind of reaction from a professional such as Emili. Other administrators, notably Reinhart, should have hit the pause button, protected Billman from the brunt of fanaticism, and let the post-season review play out.

__ The Easton Express-Times

Online: https://bit.ly/2s3emV3